My first screamer

[caroby]

Zero's

That's a very Serious looking set up, I'll bet you'll be shooting plenty of groups like the one posted. dogdude

Agree with dogdude...

Lee, you'll .....................Eventually Shoot a SCREAMER(s) that'll have near BULLET hole appearance. That will very well
look like that sighter HOLE...

Going for that 5th shot for a screamer is...... Well, nerve wrecking...! Even in a tunnel..

cale

 

[Dick Grosbier]

It's too bad you waited so long to shoot a screamer.
Precision Shooting Mag. used to award a patch to screamer shooters.

That had to be done at a registered match anyhow, as I recall. The program is still alive for IBS Shooters in registered Group, Score, 600, & 1000yd. matches. See http://internationalbenchrest.com/join/screamertext.php

 

[Tim Singleton]

Screamer patch is still alive with the nbrsa. If you shoot under a .099 or smaller at 100yd
Or .199 or smaller at 200 yd. at a registered match
There is a link on the nbrsa web site to request your patch.
I've no idea what the process is for long range


https://nbrsa.org/sites/default/files/Screamer Patch Specifications.pdf

 

[Boyd Allen]

Tim,
At 200 it is below .250. A while back I put in for an official screamer patch for a friend. He is a relatively new shooter, and it really made his day.
Boyd

 

[Hunter]

A while back I put in for an official screamer patch for a friend.

Why did you need to do that?

 

[bluechip]

I hope I don't come off as naïve, but as a person who has never actually attended a benchrest match, do they still use paper for targets? It would seem that a plastic of some sort with a clear cut boundary would make measuring much more precise. I work in a machine shop and use an optical comparator daily and I wouldn't be able to get the same measurement twice on the 'screamer' target group by the OP.

 

[Boyd Allen]

Generally, the methods for measurement and the target materials are adequate for the purpose for which they are used. Perhaps you might want to look into how targets are measured at matches. Are there any matches in your area?

 

[bluechip]

Generally, the methods for measurement and the target materials are adequate for the purpose for which they are used. Perhaps you might want to look into how targets are measured at matches. Are there any matches in your area?

I'm only 15 or 20 miles from the range at Holton MI. It would seem when one shooter has a group of say .079 and another has a group of .077 it would be very difficult to get an accurate reading with such vague boundaries. I realize the judges have a lot of experience, but it would surprise me if three different judges came up with the same number.

 

[Hunter]

I realize the judges have a lot of experience, but it would surprise me if three different judges came up with the same number.

I frequently say the scores are not as precise as the measurements suggest. It reminds me of the "fuss" over first downs in football -- spot the ball in "any old place" then bring out the precise measuring chain.

 

[Wilbur]

Well...they don't come up with the same number and the measurements may be off quite a bit. The deal is that the measurements are consistent and that a smaller measurement is a smaller group. There have been some differences along the way but not many and nowhere near enough to change the way it's done.

 

[Mike Bryant]

That's why all the targets at a match are measured by the same person. It can make a pretty tough day especially at a Nationals for the measurer. You see quite often at a match that targets will be measured smaller than they actually measure. It's usually done by placing the edge of the scoring reticle on the edge of the bullet hole and moving the other edge of the reticle to the widest edge. The scoring reticle has to be centered over the bullet hole which makes it an inexact science. You can check this by placing the scoring reticle over a single bullet hole such as on the sighter target and seeing how the reticle centers on the bullet hole. It won't be edge to edge. FWIW, I'll do just like Lee when I'm measuring my targets at home, measure edge to edge and subtract the bullet diameter. Except that I'll use the edge to edge measurement of a single bullet hole as the bullet diameter instead of using .243". Usually about .236" or so. Not completely accurate, but it's close enough for home. I've only measured at one registered match, so I'm hardly an expert on measuring groups. Measuring at a match does give you an understanding of what can go wrong when measuring. For instance, not closing the caliper from measuring one group to the next. The reticle on an official measure is a bullet diameter reticle etched in plexiglass attached to the caliper. You can have the caliper jaws opened up to say .250, lay the reticle on the bullet hole and move the reticle to widest bullet hole and add that .250" to your group size by not having the calipers closed to zero. That's the kind of thing I look for at a match when looking at how my targets are measured. The obvious errors. If you see something like that at a match, have a referee take it back and have it remeasured.

Lee don't know whether you have had a range at home before or not. But, it will certainly go a long way to improving your shooting and your placing at matches. When you can walk out the back door and be ready to shoot, it makes a difference as to having to drive somewhere to do it. You'll shoot more at home because of the easy access.

Good shooting.

Mike

 

[Hunter]

[W]hat can go wrong when measuring. For instance, not closing the caliper from measuring one group to the next....You can have the caliper jaws opened up to say .250, lay the reticle on the bullet hole and move the reticle to widest bullet hole and add that .250" to your group size by not having the calipers closed to zero.

Yep, been there done that.

 

[Chism G]

A Machinist with a private range in his/her backyard has a distinct competitive advantage.


I've said it before and I will say it again.





Glenn